drumguy8800

Since this thread is also a misguided personal attack, could we please have it closed?

You might want to get in touch with Administration over at dallasmetropolis .. the cdallen bug is tough to kill, but once armed with the right IP addresses.. you can kill it.

I apologize for your Apple troubles, but that isn't the forum page, that is the home page. What seems to be happening is a standards-compatability issue with Safari (i presume that's your browser).. probably something to do with the .opacity property.. in mozilla, it only works with -moz-opacity, and internet explorer requires filer:alpha(opacity=xx) tag.. and -moz-opacity and the ie filter are quirks within IE and Mozilla to facilitate the pages that use them.. the opacity: tag is supposed to be implemented in the next version of CSS which I believe is three. Safari, to my knowledge, does not carry with it a quirk to facilitate opacity, and since CSS 3 hasn't been *released* yet, I don't think it uses it to display pages.

But that's definitely a topic for another forum.

One major problem with all your information is the inaccuracies to buildings already under construction.. ones that we've seen plans for. One example is the Azure, which has units up to a 30th floor.. and a 30th floor does not exist in a 22 story building. You're also missing buildings and you placed a prospective skyscraper on top of Victory Plaza.. a place where we can already see construction taking place for the buildings we *know* will be placed there.

If you can provide some kind of credible information source other than your own word, I'll believe you.. but most of us are under the impression that you are horribly misguided.

Not to take a personal stab, but the word 'fiat' means an order. So, I don't exactly know why you were using the word in that context. If you were cdallen, it would probably be an attempt to look rich and cultured.

Ohh well.

I apologize.. this information is, for practical purposes, entirely incorrect.

Some of us @ Dallasmetropolis believe that Rosewood is CDAllen, a member that left for reasons more complicated than MAC incompatibility, which I believe is false, anyway.

The mandarin, we believe, will be going where he placed "Victory Tower." No official announcement has been made though, and there are certainly no construction trailers.

Stark is spelled 'Starck'

The Azure is 30 stories

and it's St. Anne's Court, not St. Anna.

Also, Ice Tower has never been announced, though caddy-corner the Azure, Harwood does speculatively place 'Glacier Tower' on the map as a future project..

Victory Center is never going to happen, they're putting in low-rise buildings to flank the arena. These are already under construction.

Victory Place I & II, though a few typical office components have been proposed are not that tall.. I don't remember the height, but certainly not 54 or 70 stories.. more like 20-30 stories.

The Starck certainly has an odd outline.

I haven't heard much about Maple Terrace or International Center V. These may be speculative projects, but they certainly are not under construction.

Things missing.. Lincoln Tower.. and some new project (maybe getting an announcment today, Tuesday is typically announcement day?) along McKinney.. residential.. though I don't remember details.. Something's about asking the city to change the 249' height max.

Another recent buzz, though not technically 'Uptown' is a 40-something res. tower on the old Lone Star site in the Arts District.

I'm from Dallas.. this picture was taken from the parking garage northeast of the red indicator in this google aerial map.. just northeast of commerce @ industrial, east of the trinity river, west of I-35E and Stemmons. The RR on the left is the UPRR.. if the downtown street grid extended this far, you'd be smackdab in the middle of Elm Street or in between Elm and Pacific.

Okay, how about Highway 360?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There is development on both sides of 360 that extends east and west continuously into both Dallas and Fort Worth. Try again.

You'll note that while there used to be quite a distinction between a lot of the cities, this has changed significantly over the last 30 years. ('74, '89, '03)

Just something I've noticed.. certain forumers here are VERY hostile towards the DFW region. It's sad that when you see a factual piece of evidence as a 'threat' against your own self-appointed superiority, you fire back with unbacked remarks that sound like they came off some elementry school yard.

Would any of you like to draw us some lines as to where the "Fort Worth side" ends and where the "Dallas side" begins? Barring rivers, I'm having trouble seeing those lines that people here are so adamant about. Anyone know?

Please. Enlighten me.

Dallas is short.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

nahh. the pano's just wide

Here's another shot, taken from Hampton Road and I-30. From L to R, Lower Stemmons, Market Center, Turtle Creek (in the back is North Central Corridor), Cityplace, Uptown, and Downtown.

I love the Nasher. Again, these are all my pictures, except for the very last. Just a request, not to sound like an *** or anything, I've already made myself one on the "Dallas #3" thread, but could you please provide credit where credit is due? I find my photos all over the internet and it's very dissapointing how they slip into public domain. I really am not very keen on plastering them with watermarks, or placing restrictions on their usage. Thanks.

So I have NO Idea where you got 430 somthing for Dallas... If you plan to lie to Haif again, bewarned... We check these things out. So the differnce in the numbers are nothing but a meer "6" so don't even say that "Dallas has far more". Thank you and, good night!

I wasn't lying, and I provided the place where I got the information. Apparently, it does include proposed, never-built, etc, so the numbers were, in fact, a little skewed. Anyway, here's where they are from:

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/me/?id=100032

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/me/?id=100035

Houston always going to be number one in texas. Dallas and San Antonio is going to have a hard time playing catch up, cause one thing where all the jobs at? Its right here in houston. Don't get me wrong, Dallas has jobs too, but not like Houston. Besides, houston has more entertainment then Dallas.

Dallas has more sports teams.. and Dallas has a higher population, and thusly, more jobs. Talk about lying.

But everyone, I'll agree that Houston & Dallas are very similar.. especially when viewed on a global scale. Neither of us are as dinky as San Antonio, and neither of us are monolithic like NYC or Tokyo. We're very similar in most regards. I was just rather dissapointed that people were jumping all over Dallas' municipal population falling underneath San Antonio's, when it's really not a fair way to measure things.

Even if none of you agree with me, DFW metro is more populous and has more 12+ buildings than Houston. It's a fact. Micromanage my point of view all you want. It seems to me that all you've done is dodge these facts in order to declare yourselves the victor. I'm not saying that the municipalities are inherently the same just because they are connected, I'm saying that they are part of one metro. And the DFW metro just happens to be bigger than the Houston metro, even if the municipal land area of Dallas happens to have lower numbers than the massive entity that is the municipality of Houston.

I'm getting Huntsville and Galveston from Emporis. They consider it the "Houston-Galveston-Huntsville" metro.

I don't consider "12 storeys" urban, that's also what Emporis uses.

DFW is not "one organism", and its not one city. Its a Metropolis:a large and densely populated urban area; may include several independent administrative districts. (i.e. Fort Worth, Irving, Arlington etc.)

Yes, it is one "organism." An organism is made up of several organs. Which are, the municipalities.

You can't tell when you exit Fort Worth and enter Arlington. You can't tell when you exit Arlington and enter Grand Prairie. You can't tell when you exit Grand Prairie and enter Dallas. It's all one CITY. Administrative districts do not make up a CITY. When thinking of London, by your definition, that would only be London Proper: An area housing only about 23,000 Residents. But surely, you would think that the entire area housing 10,000,000 people is part of what people refer to as London! You seem to have municipality vs. city completely screwed up. City = metropolis, or city = urbanized area within a metropolis. Often, metropolises are bounded by the US Government by county designations, but the designations I have provided are urbanized areas.

I'm starting to get a little heated, and so will everyone else if this discussion continues. But the facts remain- don't try and chop up Fort Worth and Dallas so that you can say Houston is bigger. And surely don't try and say that San Antonio is- or at least, that it's "ahead," whatever skewed mental synapse that was spawned from.

Well, some yes, but I refuse to take pictures of people if they are within close proximity.

Ihope you didn't include proposed, never built, On-Hold, Under Construction, Demolished or "fantasy" in your post...

Houston has more "High-rises" in the city, then Dallas does. The # of High-rises in the metro are not as much as Dallas, but when you include the metro, your including major areas such as Ft. Worth... Which is the second biggest city in the Dallas Metro. Houston metro's second biggest is Pasadena, which is only a meer 120,000. So when you compare metros, I'd say Dallas has got everyone in Texas Beat, but when it comes down to the City, Dallas is behind S.A. And Houston. No Matter what...

We have the facts already, so you don't need to stick your head up from the dust of you falling out of second place...

Wow, way to be a jerk about it. I'm sorry, but your metro area included GALVESTON and HUNTSVILLE. Which are REALLY FREAKING FAR AWAY. Galveston and Huntsville really shouldn't be considered part of Houston, should they? It isn't completely urbanized in between the three cities. But in between Dallas and Fort Worth, because its such a short distance, it IS urbanized, and they are the same thing.

And no, I didn't use any propsed or under construction numbers those are all BUILT structures at or above 12 storeys.

I'm sorry that Houston has only one major population center. DFW is one organism. It's a city from Weatherford to Mesquite. Urbanized. Would you like to exclude Irving? It has a group of buildings too.. I'm sorry they aren't within the municipality of Dallas! But it sure as heck is in DFW! When you take into account a "city," you take into account an urbanized area. Okay? Please don't mudsling.

The numbers above combine the entire metro area.. once you're outside the area defined by an MSA, populations (and especially buildings) become so irrelevant to the total numbers compiled that landsize becomes obsolete. Basically, those numbers cover both region's urbanized areas.

Here's how the numbers were defined:

Dallas-Fort Worth Metro Area

Houston-Baytown-Huntsville Metro Area

As you can see, Houston's even includes cities as far off as Galveston. The DFW metro area is probably fairly close to the same size as the Houston metro area, in terms of statistical MSAs..

Tons more of these nonskylines here.

Some DART:

These are just some downtown stations.. Akard, St. Paul, east of St. Paul, and Union, respectively. There are some more downtown station photos and photos from other places along the DART line.. and MATA (McKinney Ave. Trolley) pictures here.

Photos 1, 3, 4, and 5 are mine, from my website. Also, the second picture on the uptown density thread is mine. Here are some others. For more, please visit the Dallas section of my website. There are 205 pictures of Dallas in there.. plus, if you go to the main page, pictures of Fort Worth & San Antonio.

From Cityview (a DISD Highschool) in Oak Cliff, looking north.

From Preservation Dallas, looking west:

From the Jefferson Street Viaduct, looking east:

From the Hyatt Regency Hotel, looking east:

From the Top of the Hyatt Regency Hotel, looking east:

And some nonskyline..

I don't know if this has been posted or not.. I just know that this thread is about Dallas dropping to #3 in Texas.

Let's look at some other numbers though, that go beyond the bounds of municipal size: Dallas is suburb-locked, Houston is not. Dallas can't expand.. but when you take into account Dallas' suburbs, it eclipses both Houston and San Antonio metro area.

Dallas: 1,208,318 in city and 5,784,645 in metro

Houston: 2,009,690 in city and 5,176,061 in metro

San Antonio: 1,214,725 in city and 1,820,719 in metro

Also, an interesting fact.. one one of the HAIF banner ads, it says 'bigger than dallas.. prettier than austin..' something like that. Well, Dallas metro is bigger than Houston & San Antonio.. and Dallas metro area has MORE BUILDINGS! Don't believe me?

Number of buildings above 12 stories:

Dallas metro: 432 buildings.

Houston metro: 392 buildings.

San Antonio metro: 59 buildings.

hmmmmmm. But, Houston does have Dallas one-up, well, two-up on one thing: The tallest 'scrapers in the state.

And for those of you who contest those numbers, i got the from skyscrapers.com, and they are valid. Numbers at skyscraperpage.com are very skewed. It lists San Antonio HIGHER than Dallas in terms of # of buildings, and anyone with a pair of eyes can see that San Antonio's downtown is miniscule compared to the Houston & Dallas'.

Just wanted to clarify things. Municipal boundaries mean nothing when looking at a city's size. A city is the entire organism.. the entire metro.